Impact of in vitro findings on clinical protocols for the adhesion of CAD-CAM blocks: A systematic integrative review and meta-analysis

Fracture resistance of additively or subtractively manufactured resin-based definitive crowns: Effect of restorative material, resin cement, and cyclic loading

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how restorative material, resin cement, and cyclic loading affect the fracture resistance of resin-based crowns fabricated by using additive or subtractive manufacturing.

METHODS

A right first molar crown standard tessellation language (STL) file was used to fabricate 120 crowns from one subtractively manufactured polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (SM) and two additively manufactured resin composites (AM-B and AM-S) (N = 40). These crowns were randomly divided into 4 groups within each material according to the dual-polymerizing resin cement to be used (RX and PN) and the aging condition (n = 10). After cementation, the crowns without cyclic loading were subjected to fracture testing, while the others were first cyclically loaded (1.7 Hz, 1.2 million cycles, and 49-N load) and then subjected to fracture testing. Data were analyzed with generalized linear model analysis (α = .05).

RESULTS

Fracture resistance of the crowns was affected by material, resin cement, and cyclic loading (P ≤ .030). However, none of the interactions significantly affected fracture resistance of tested crowns (P ≥ .140). Among tested materials, SM had the highest fracture resistance, whereas AM-B had the lowest (P ≤ .025). RX led to higher fracture resistance, and cyclic loading decreased the fracture resistance (P ≤ .026).

SIGNIFICANCE

Tested materials can be considered reliable in terms of fracture resistance in short- or mid-term (5 years of intraoral simulation) when used for single molar crowns with 2 mm occlusal thickness. In the long term, polymer-infiltrated ceramic network crowns cemented with RelyX Universal may provide promising results and be less prone to complications considering higher fracture resistance values obtained.

Influence of universal adhesives and silane coupling primer on bonding performance to CAD-CAM resin-based composites: A laboratory investigation

OBJECTIVE

Obtaining strong resin bonds to computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) resin-based composites with dispersed fillers (CCRBCs) poses a challenge. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effect of three universal adhesives and a two-component silane coupling agent on the shear bond strength to three (CCRBCs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight hundred and sixty-four specimens of Brilliant Crios, Lava Ultimate, and Tetric CAD were polished or grit blasted, bonded with Adhese Universal DC, One Coat 7 Universal (OC7), and Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive (SBU) with or without a silane primer. Shear bond strength was measured after 24 h and 10,000 thermocycles. Linear regressions were performed (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

After thermocycling, bond strengths were similar for the universal adhesives on polished Brilliant Crios and Lava Ultimate (p ≥ 0.408). Grit blasted Tetric CAD showed no significant differences (p ≥ 0.096). The silane primer had minimal impact on grit blasted Tetric CAD (p ≥ 0.384). The silane primer increased the bond strength of OC7 to Brilliant Crios (p = 0.001) but decreased the adhesion of SBU to Brilliant Crios and Lava Ultimate (p ≤ 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Bond strength of universal adhesives varied with CCRBC type. The two-component silane coupling agent showed mixed effects on adhesive performance.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Selecting universal adhesives from the same CCRBC product line does not always guarantee superior bond strength. The efficacy of silane coupling agents differs based on the bonding substrate.

Adhesive Performance of Resin Cement to Glass-Ceramic and Polymer-Based Ceramic CAD/CAM Materials after Applying Self-Etching Ceramic Primer or Different Surface Treatments

Ensuring optimum bond strength during cementation is vital for restoration success, with the practicality of the process being crucial in clinical practice. This study analyzed the effect of a single-step self-etching ceramic primer (MEP) and various surface treatments on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) between resin cement and glass-ceramic or polymer-based ceramic CAD/CAM materials. Specimens were fabricated from leucite-based glass-ceramic (LEU), lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC), resin nanoceramic (RNC), and polymer infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) (n = 160). They were then classified based on the surface treatments (n = 10): control (no treatment); sandblasting with Al2O3 (AL); etching with hydrofluoric acid (HF); and MEP application. Scanning electron microscopy was used to evaluate the surface topography. µSBS was measured after cementation and thermocycling procedures. Failure modes were examined with a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis involved two-way analysis of variance and Tukey HSD tests with a significance level of 0.05. µSBS was significantly influenced by both surface treatment and CAD/CAM material type. The most enhanced µSBS values for each material, regarding the surface treatment, were: LEU and LDC, HF; RNC, AL; PICN, AL or HF. MEP significantly increased the µSBS values of CAD/CAM materials except RNC, yet it did not yield the highest µSBS values for any of them.

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) are used because of their mechanical properties, ease of cementation protocols, and lack of requirements for acid conditioning or adhesive systems. SARCs are generally dual-cured, photoactivated, and self-cured, with a slight increase in acidic pH, allowing self-adhesiveness and increasing resistance to hydrolysis. This systematic review assessed the adhesive strength of SARC systems luted to different substrates and computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic blocks. The PubMed/MedLine and Science Direct databases were searched using the Boolean formula [((dental or tooth) AND (self-adhesive) AND (luting or cement) AND CAD-CAM) NOT (endodontics or implants)]. Of the 199 articles obtained, 31 were selected for the quality assessment. Lava Ultimate (resin matrix filled with nanoceramic) and Vita Enamic (polymer-infiltrated ceramic) blocks were the most tested. Rely X Unicem 2 was the most tested resin cement, followed by Rely X Unicem > Ultimate > U200, and μTBS was the test most used. The meta-analysis confirmed the substrate-dependent adhesive strength of SARCs, with significant differences between them and between SARCs and conventional resin-based adhesive cement (α < 0.05). SARCs are promising. However, one must be aware of the differences in the adhesive strengths. An appropriate combination of materials must be considered to improve the durability and stability of restorations.